African American History Culture : Ending the theory of "Aryan invasion" in India.

In the book titled UNDERGROUND:THE DISINFORMATION GUIDE TO ANCIENT CIVILIZATIONS,ASTONISHING ARCHAEOLOGY AND HIDDEN HISTORY there is section that begins on page 39 entitled Ocean Origins of Indian Civilization that goes on to possibly prove the Aryan Invasion Theory wrong,and that is the authors (N.S.Rajaram) purpose whom is possibly from India himself.(the book itself is a compilation of various researchers opinions,no pictures are provided so there may not be any afrikans involved,but it is interesting notheless but definetaly not the gospel of all truth.)

Now,what does this have to do with us Afrikans, the position of India is not that far from Afrika and given the proof posted in other forums(and data by Runoko Rashidi on http://www.nbufront.org/ of our ancestors travels it may prove that Afrikans were participants (if not the sole founders,not to sound extreme) of Indian Civilization.

The Excerpt goes ,pg. 39 4th paragraph(paraphrased)
Going back for untold millenia,India and East and Southeast Asia (as well as parts of E.Afrika though not mentioned in the text itself,added by myself) have been bound by the ties of nature,ie geology,climate,flora,fauna,etc. The peoples were also very close (ie Chinese,Malays,Thais,Indonesians) have left may records to attest to this fact of much closeness even though much of it was destroyed by Euro-colonialism under Catholic Spain and other countries that spanned for 3 centuries.It led to the imposition on the region of a version of history and culture divorced from its natural environment and human actitivies.In India's case it has resulted in its colonial rulers postulating sources and origins of Indias civilization closer to Europe rather than India or any other lands not in Europe which began in the 18th century and continues.The primary target has been a European source for the Vedas language and culture.

The result has been a break with the past and the creation of a historical and anthropological link to Europe and Eurasia.They have given rise to many contradictions between theory based conclusions and actual hard evidence that is beginning to rise only now after Indias "independence." The contradictions are not confined to details of interpretation,but as we shall soon see,pervade every aspect of literature,archeology and even natural environment.

These contradiction point to some serious flaws that archaeologists have been using for the past two centuries.Before we look at the contradictions,we must take a brief look at the version of his-story- and offshoot of Indias recent colonial past- that has given rise to them.

Background:A non-existent problem ( paraphrased)
The Aryan Invasion theory(AIT) us purely political and is a theory based on no evidence that has acquired a life of its own. The basix of the AIT are :the Aryans are responsible for the Rigveda which is most important literature in Indian history,arrived at 1500 B.C.E. and imposed their language and culture on the inhabitants they dominated.Many researchers place the Vedic literature as the AIT's evidence but fail to acknowledge that it has been manipulated to fit their agenda alone.

In the Rigveda:

---The word Arya shows up less than 40 times.

-It has more than 1,000 hyms.

--It is often considered that the Vedic Aryans are a race of people. Aryan actually means a standard of living, an ideal. It was the Sanskrit speaking people of thousands of years ago that gave the word arya to signify a gentleman, an ideal person, someone on the path of purity. It was a term meant for those who were on the cutting edge of social evolution. Another way of interpreting the word aryan is that ar also means white or clear. Ya refers to God. Ya also refers to Yadu, or Krishna. Thus, aryan means those who have, or are developing, a clear path or a clear consciousness toward God. The word "Arya" is an honorific of the Sanskrit word "Amarkosha" which identifies a person of good conduct.

----All ancient literature have very little,if anything to say about "Aryanism" or "Aryans." So there is no reference to the "ARyan" type.

--AFter more than 200 years of study by these "researchers" they are still not sure of the identity of the Aryan.
(IN OTHER WORDS,THEY DO NOT SEE THEMSELVES ON THAT HISTORICAL STAGE IN INDIA LIKE THEY WOULD WANT TO)

--As far back as 1939 Julian Huxley,a biologist, has dismissed it as "political and propagandist " literature.

--Researchers have not been able to find an Aryan linguistic group,all of Indias literature and linguistics go back to Panini and Yaska and no nothing of an Aryan language.

Historiography:Mismatches (paraphrased):

The AIT has many contradictions,here are a few glaring ones:

---The AIT is told as an invasion from Europe and Eurasia but there is no archeological evidence to support this,instead,the evidence shows of a large migration from India to W.Asia and Europe,the other way around.

----The geography described in the Rigveda (ie river systems) corresponed to North India in the 24 milleniam B.C.E and earlier,not Europe or Eurasia.

----The flora and fauna described in the Vedic literature ,especially in the sacred symbols, are tropical and subtropical varieties and not from the temperat climate or the steppes.

I think the problem with the Aryan Invasion theory is not solely the invasion or encroachment of non-aboriginal Dravidian or Africoid (negroid) phenotypes (or "so-called races") into Southern Asia, but mainly or more importantly the felonious idea and the historical misnomer that “white Indo-Europeans” invaded and brought high culture, knowledge and science to India (Bharati).

There are those who academically theorize against the previous accounts of the “Aryan Invasion” theory that are not necessarily always trying to enhance or uphold the factual history of preexisting, aboriginal, and highly advanced Black Indus Valley cultures, such as Harappan and Mohenjo-Daro. Some are using this recent “non-Aryan invasion” theory to claim that the Brahmin and/or Indo-European racial castes (Caucasoid or non-Dravidian and non-Africoid) were ALWAYS PRESENT and were a dominant force or the primary spiritual and intellectual influence in Sub-continental Black Asia.

I think we must be cautious as we analyze these new interpretations of Ancient Indian history.

I think the problem with the Aryan Invasion theory is not solely the invasion or encroachment of non-aboriginal Dravidian or Africoid (negroid) phenotypes (or "so-called races") into Southern Asia, but mainly or more importantly the felonious idea and the historical misnomer that “white Indo-Europeans” invaded and brought high culture, knowledge and science to India (Bharati).

There are those who academically theorize against the previous accounts of the “Aryan Invasion” theory that are not necessarily always trying to enhance or uphold the factual history of preexisting, aboriginal, and highly advanced Black Indus Valley cultures, such as Harappan and Mohenjo-Daro. Some are using this recent “non-Aryan invasion” theory to claim that the Brahmin and/or Indo-European racial castes (Caucasoid or non-Dravidian and non-Africoid) were ALWAYS PRESENT and were a dominant force or the primary spiritual and intellectual influence in Sub-continental Black Asia.

I think we must be cautious as we analyze these new interpretations of Ancient Indian history.

Peace

Click to expand...

Hello Wonderful Brother!

It's good to read ya again and see that you are alive and kicking. Missed ya Brother. Hoping you will be around more often.

Here is a website with several good links about this purported theory.

One of the big problems with this theory is that it claims that Aryans are from the Caucus Mountains, and that they are white folks. Well the problem with that is that the word caucasian did not come around until about 1807 and the word caucus did not come until about 1795 (From a German Antropologist Johann Blumenbach the author of Race).

First of all Arya is just a spiritual and enlightened being, it has nothing to do with pigmentation.

These two little facts in itself are enought to disprove the theory, but it is sad to me, and it hurts me deeply about how the European has attempted to destroy the history and lineage of the people of the indus valley. I hope that one day this social imperalism can be undone.

Here is a website with several good links about this purported theory.

One of the big problems with this theory is that it claims that Aryans are from the Caucus Mountains, and that they are white folks. Well the problem with that is that the word caucasian did not come around until about 1807 and the word caucus did not come until about 1795 (From a German Antropologist Johann Blumenbach the author of Race).

First of all Arya is just a spiritual and enlightened being, it has nothing to do with pigmentation.

These two little facts in itself are enought to disprove the theory, but it is sad to me, and it hurts me deeply about how the European has attempted to destroy the history and lineage of the people of the indus valley. I hope that one day this social imperalism can be undone.

I just checked out the links submitted in this post and after reading just a few paragraphs of Dr. Frawley’s writings or counterpoints to the “Aryan Invasion theory”, it is obvious he is subtly projecting a racist alternative theory, as I suggested in a previous post. Basically he is surmising that ALL the people of ancient India were Caucasian! That’s why I said we must be careful with how we interpret these new perspectives to India's history.

I just checked out the links submitted in this post and after reading just a few paragraphs of Dr. Frawley’s writings or counterpoints to the “Aryan Invasion theory”, it is obvious he is subtly projecting a racist alternative theory, as I suggested in a previous post. Basically he is surmising that ALL the people of ancient India were Caucasian! That’s why I said we must be careful with how we interpret these new perspectives to India's history.

Click to expand...

Yea that is the only fault of that particular article and his book, the references to Indo-European.

This is the same guy who claimed to have decoded the Harappan cipher and to have effectively proven a presence of Sanskrit speakers and Vedic culture, via a bogus horse seal from the Valley, going back several thousand years earlier than is actually the case.

What you actually find in the example of your David Frawleys, Koenraad Elsts and NS Rajarams are Out-of-India proponents, none of whom have any genuine interest in the dispassionate reporting of history.

David Frawley is a Hindu, a "Vedanta scholar." Looking to him for the authentic reporting of Indian history is comparable to trusting a "Creation Scientist" with a degree from Jesus Christ University to give you an unbiased version of the death of Rameses.

Here is his New Age-y Ayurvedic website, in which you can see the opulent hippie's photo:

Rajaram is in a similar boat, in that he attempts to interpret the history of the Indus by the Vedas. This has made his name anathema amongst genuine, specialized scholars of the subject of pre-Vedic India and India generally:

As to this Koenraad Elst, he is a virulent anti-Islamist and, to that end, would side with *any* group for whom anti-Islamism is endemic, in this case, the Hindutva.

Now, for the brother who claims that an "Indo-European" does not exist, please prove this. The most indoctrinated Indocentrist will recognize the commonality between the languages of the Ukraine, Italy, Anatolia, Iran, India etc. as having existed; they simply invert the scheme, having the Indo-Europeans speakers moving from India *into* Europe.

Keep in mind that Indo-European is not a specific reference to "race," a concept which the anthropological community has gone to great lengths to disqualify anyways, but speaks specifically to the linguistic connexion between a prototypical community of speakers. In the same way that we can establish that African languages, and Semitic languages are related, we can relate the Indo-European tongues.